Results from case studies are not predictive of results in other cases. Results in other cases may vary.
*Based on Philips in-house assessment by five clinical experts, comparing manual versus Precise Positioning in 40 clinical cases using a human body phantom.
**Data collected across Philips CT scanners using Remote Services; numbers will be updated on a rolling basis when more CT 3500 data is available.
1. According to the definition of AI from the EU High-Level Expert Group.
2. In clinical practice, the use of Precise Image may reduce CT patient dose depending on the clinical task, patient size, and anatomical location. A consultation with a radiologist and a physicist should be made to determine the appropriate dose to obtain diagnostic image quality for the particular clinical task. Dose reduction assessments were performed using reference body protocols with 1.0 mm slices at the “Smoother” setting of Precise Image, and tested on the MITA CT IQ Phantom (CCT189, The Phantom Laboratory) assessing the 10 mm pin and compared to filtered-back projection. A range is seen across the 4 pins, using a channelized hoteling observer tool, that includes lower image noise by 85% and improved low-contrast detectability from 0% to 60% at 50% to 80% dose reduction. NPS curve shift is used to evaluate image appearance, as measured on a 20 cm water phantom in the center 50 mm x 50 mm region of interest, with an average shift of 6% or less.
3. Precise Image is currently not available for pediatrics.
4. Toth T, Ge Z, Daly MP. The influence of patient centering on CT dose and image noise. Med Phys. 2007;34(7):3093-3101. doi.org/10.1118/1.2748113
5. Quantitative Report 2020 Incisive CT. The MarketTech Group. November 2020.